City has “not established reasonable likelihood of success” or any funding to keep hospital open
Last Saturday, Jersey City filed a lawsuit in response to the closure of Christ Hospital, which is operated by Hudson Regional Health (“HRH”). The city’s complaint argues that “state regulations require that ‘closure of a general hospital requires a certificate of need and shall follow the full review process’” before alleging that “[t]o date, Christ Hospital has never obtained a certificate of need and has never filed such written notification.” As a result, the city concludes, “Any closure is therefore unlawful.” [Superior Court of NJ]
Based on these arguments, the city sought an emergency injunction to keep the hospital open while the lawsuit found its way through the courts. Judge Anthony D’Elia denied the injunction on the grounds that the city “did not establish a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits.” Specifically, the judge cast strong doubt on the city’s central claim that the hospital closure was illegal:
“The cited Regulation by the City [i.e., the need for a certificate for closure] indicates that certain requirements would have had to have been satisfied to close a “hospital”. The hospital in fact did close in November of 2025 which would indicate that the provisions of the Regulation were satisfied.” [emphasis in the original] [Superior Court of NJ]
Judge D’Elia appears to reject the city’s argument that a certificate of need was necessary to close Christ Hospital’s emergency room on Saturday, since Christ ceased to be a “general hospital” when the rest of the hospital shut down in November 2025. While denial of an emergency injunction is not a final ruling on the lawsuit, the judge’s reasoning does provide some insight into the city’s chances of success.
Despite the court order’s indications to the contrary, Mayor Solomon continues to assert that Christ Hospital violated the certificate of need regulation. He was quoted in the city’s press release in response to the ruling:
Read more: Judge Casts Doubt on City’s Argument that Christ Hospital Closed Illegally““HRH violated state law. They failed to obtain a certificate of need. They failed to provide the required notice.”“ [City of Jersey City]
At a press conference on March 14, Mayor Solomon seemed to imply that the ruling meant the city did not have standing to enforce the state laws on closure regulations:
“It is up to the state to enforce state laws. Now the penalties are laughable, so they have to be changed. I wish we at the city had the ability to prosecute but we don’t.” [HCV]
However, the judge did in fact make clear that the opposite is true in his order: The city does have standing to sue to enforce the state law; the judge simply doubts the state law is applicable.
Another interesting passage from the judge’s ruling touches on the funding problems facing Christ Hospital:
“…all parties conceded that multiple attempts to obtain funding from the State/City have proven to be fruitless. Thus, without such funding the City’s relief could not have been successful.”
In other words, a failing hospital that is losing millions of dollars a week1 cannot be forced to remain open indefinitely.
Lamentably, none of the plans or proposals released by Jersey City’s politicians have realistically addressed the root causes of the hospital’s closure: poor financials and no viable source of funding.
HRH officials have floated redevelopment as a way to fund “a brand-new, state-of-the-art hospital adjacent to the current facility” [HCV]. Jersey City’s elected politicians have roundly rejected this proposal; with Mayor Solomon saying last week that “Jersey City does not negotiate with lives of our residents” [City of Jersey City] and removing all ability to fund the hospital via senior housing or supportive housing in December by rezoning the site. However, neither Solomon nor any other local elected official [HCV] has presented an alternative proposal that identifies an alternative funding source.
A separate lawsuit, where HRH alleges that Jersey City’s removal of senior and supportive housing as permitted uses at the Christ Hospital site was arbitrary and capricious, remains pending.